The Work-based Learning Route in the Netherlands and in England: comparing ideas and meanings.

The paper provides the outcomes of two small-scale sets of interviews carried out in the Netherlands and in England on views about and interpretations of the work-based route for young people. In the light of current revival of interest in work-based learning for young people, and in particular the apprenticeship model in England, I was particularly interested in the issue of parity of esteem between the work-based route and other routes. Whereas in the Netherlands the focus for the development of Vocational Education and Training (VET) is on the full-time vocational route, which has a reasonably high status, England has opted for the apprenticeship route to be the development tool for high quality VET. The paper explores what we can learn about our own experiences in England in the light of what is happening elsewhere (Raffe, 1998; Raffe et al ., 1999). It becomes clear from the data obtained that policy development in the Netherlands aims to increase the status of work-based learning through incorporating the route into the full-time route and providing end qualifications that can be achieved through either a full-time college-based route or through a work-based learning route. The modern apprenticeship route or work-based learning route as such has not a high status, contrary to what is sometimes claimed to be the case. In England, the aim of policymakers is to create a work-based learning route, which is considered to be a high quality route, and is comparable to the general/academic route. The paper shows that there are various reasons as to why this attempt might fail. Both countries aim to provide a 'ladder' or 'column' of opportunities in VET. The research shows that very few young people in fact move up a ladder, but rather move into work-based learning or apprenticeships at certain points on the continuum, and subsequently move sideways into general or theoretical provision in order to be able to progress higher up. Target groups for work-based learning are different at the lower end from those at levels 3, 4 and 5. Very few participants in either country move from level 1 up to level 4 through participation in a work-based route, and it may therefore be appropriate to talk about the provision of a climbing framework, where young people move backwards and forwards and sideways, rather than about a ladder of opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]